I like running old OSes on hardware that came out several years later,
for the fun of it and the speed they reach, but it can be a real
challenge.

Some people have had trouble installing Windows 95 when the CPU is
faster than 300MHz. When the installation reboots for the first time
after copying files, it hangs with "Windows protection error". There
are patches for OSR2, 2.1 and 2.5 but none are mentioned for Windows
95 retail or Windows 95a.

However, this worked for me: when the installation reboots, I have a
boot diskette in the floppy drive, so it boots to it. On the diskette
I have the two files ESDI_506.PDR and SCSIPORT.PDR coming from a self
extracting patch, called K6UPD95A.EXE. I copy those to \Windows\System
\Iosubsys, overwriting the ones there, then reboot into the Windows
installation and it proceeds without problems.

That self extracting file seems to be getting rare on the Web, I found
it at

http://www.62nds.co.nz/software/

Someone might want to store it somewhere else.

It's meant for Windows 95a, with an AMD CPU 350MHz or faster but it
worked for me, installing Windows 95 retail on a machine with a
Pentium 4, 2.0GHz.

I understand that another limitation comes up with CPUs faster than
2.0 GHz, unfortunately I haven't found a way around that one, there is
a patch for Windows 98, also affected by this, but it won't work with
Windows 95.

> I like running old OSes on hardware that came out several years later,
> for the fun of it and the speed they reach, but it can be a real
> challenge.
>
> Some people have had trouble installing Windows 95 when the CPU is
> faster than 300MHz. When the installation reboots for the first time
> after copying files, it hangs with "Windows protection error". There
> are patches for OSR2, 2.1 and 2.5 but none are mentioned for Windows
> 95 retail or Windows 95a.
>
> However, this worked for me: when the installation reboots, I have a
> boot diskette in the floppy drive, so it boots to it. On the diskette
> I have the two files ESDI_506.PDR and SCSIPORT.PDR coming from a self
> extracting patch, called K6UPD95A.EXE. I copy those to \Windows\System
> \Iosubsys, overwriting the ones there, then reboot into the Windows
> installation and it proceeds without problems.
>
> That self extracting file seems to be getting rare on the Web, I found
> it at
>
> http://www.62nds.co.nz/software/
>
> Someone might want to store it somewhere else.
>
> It's meant for Windows 95a, with an AMD CPU 350MHz or faster but it
> worked for me, installing Windows 95 retail on a machine with a
> Pentium 4, 2.0GHz.
>
> I understand that another limitation comes up with CPUs faster than
> 2.0 GHz, unfortunately I haven't found a way around that one, there is
> a patch for Windows 98, also affected by this, but it won't work with
> Windows 95.
>
> Interestingly, Windows 3.x doesn't have such limitations.
>
> Claude

Yes I have used the patch to get win95 working on a faster CPU...
the only confusing thing is that the patch needs to run from Windows
so unless you can get to safe mode you need to know the "secret"
of using the command line switch to manually extract the files.

In message , philo
writes:
>
> wrote in message
> >> I like running old OSes on hardware that came out several years later,
>> for the fun of it and the speed they reach, but it can be a real
>> challenge.
>>
>> Some people have had trouble installing Windows 95 when the CPU is
>> faster than 300MHz. When the installation reboots for the first time
>> after copying files, it hangs with "Windows protection error". There
>> are patches for OSR2, 2.1 and 2.5 but none are mentioned for Windows
>> 95 retail or Windows 95a.
[]
If it's an AMD processor, there was a known problem, and it appeared
somewhere between 300 and 350 MHz depending on I know not what (probably
temperature); wouldn't go into Windows (95) [or froze shortly after IIRR
- it's a long time ago). I don't know if Microsoft or AMD ever agreed
who had got things wrong (basically it involved the software using the
hardware in a way that continued to work on Intel processors but not AMD
ones above 3xx MHz), but the patch - for there was one, and it worked
fine - appeared on AMD's website. IIRR, Windows 98 didn't have the
problem.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

> I understand that another limitation comes up with CPUs faster than
> 2.0 GHz, unfortunately I haven't found a way around that one, there is
> a patch for Windows 98, also affected by this, but it won't work with
> Windows 95.
>
> Interestingly, Windows 3.x doesn't have such limitations.
>
> Claude

More on that. There definitely is a 2.0 GHz CPU limitation for
installing Windows 95 but once it is installed, it seems one can use a
faster speed without running into that problem. I'm up to 2.4 GHz,
simply by overclocking to 120MHz x 20, and so far so good. I wonder
how far that will will work.

On Jan 23, 7:54�pm, Claud...@aol.com wrote:
> On Dec 24 2008, 8:28 pm, Claud...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > I understand that another limitation comes up with CPUs faster than
> > 2.0 GHz, unfortunately I haven't found a way around that one, there is
> > a patch for Windows 98, also affected by this, but it won't work with
> > Windows 95.
>
> > Interestingly, Windows 3.x doesn't have such limitations.
>
> > Claude
>
> More on that. There definitely is a 2.0 GHz CPU limitation for
> installing Windows 95 but once it is installed, it seems one can use a
> faster speed without running into that problem. I'm up to 2.4 GHz,
> simply by overclocking to 120MHz x 20, and so far so good. I wonder
> how far that will will work.
>
> Claude

Still no problems at 2.82GHz. I had to stop there, having reached the
overclocking limit for that particular setup (not bad for a 2.0GHz
Northwood and air cooling). I tried with a 3.4GHz Prescott and the
"NDIS" problem reappeared right away.

Regardless it turns out there are patches for Windows 95 and that
particular problem.

On Dec 28 2008, 2:45�am, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:
> In message , philo writes:
>
> > wrote in message
> > > >> I like running old OSes on hardware that came out several years later,
> >> for the fun of it and the speed they reach, but it can be a real
> >> challenge.
>
> >> Some people have had trouble installing Windows 95 when the CPU is
> >> faster than 300MHz. When the installation reboots for the first time
> >> after copying files, it hangs with "Windows protection error". There
> >> are patches for OSR2, 2.1 and 2.5 but none are mentioned for Windows
> >> 95 retail or Windows 95a.
>
> []
> If it's an AMD processor, there was a known problem, and it appeared
> somewhere between 300 and 350 MHz depending on I know not what (probably
> temperature); wouldn't go into Windows (95) [or froze shortly after IIRR
> - it's a long time ago). I don't know if Microsoft or AMD ever agreed
> who had got things wrong (basically it involved the software using the
> hardware in a way that continued to work on Intel processors but not AMD
> ones above 3xx MHz), but the patch - for there was one, and it worked
> fine - appeared on AMD's website. IIRR, Windows 98 didn't have the
> problem.
> --
> J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
> **http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htmfor ludicrously
> outdated thoughts on PCs. **
>
> Advertising is legalized lying. - H.G. Wells

Yes, and even though the patch was meant for AMD CPUs faster than
300MHz, the problem is identical, and the patch works, for some non-
AMD CPUs, like Pentium 4s. However that patch was only for Windows 95
OSR2 and above.